Multiple avenues reporting on this. There were a group of NFL players who released a video asking the league to condemn racism. What they are asking for is: "On behalf of the National Football League, this is what we, the players, would like to hear you state: 'We, the National Football League, condemn racism and the systematic oppression of black people,'" they said. '"We, the National Football League, admit wrong in silencing our players from peacefully protesting. We, the National Football League, believe Black Lives Matter.'" I completely get the ask, and the first and last one I wouldn't think would cause any real problem (other than perhaps the one I will bring up for the second one): We, the National Football League, admit wrong in silencing our players from peacefully protesting. The reason that might be a bit problematic is the NFL did that primarily due to backlash against it. It was a money decision, not any sort of political stance. Recent events will likely diminish that backlash, but not sure to what degree. The NFL will certainly think about it in those terms, however: "What would be the monetary impact of making that statement?" One could argue that maybe they should do it anyway, because its the right thing to do. No problem with that argument, but the NFL will still ask the same question. I wonder what the player's stance would be if the NFL turned it back on them. "we will make that statement, as long as the players agree to take a pay cut commensurate with any revenue drop we get from making it". I suspect most of the players would have a real problem with that...although that's to a large degree what they're asking the NFL to do. Thoughts? On the video...on the ask...on whether or not the NFL will do it...and why or why they may not? Your own personal thoughts?
Insincere bs, the league sensed where majority public opinion is moving and decided to switch stance. But hey its better than denyin the players the ability to protest. Gonna upset alot of faux patriots though.
I agree. Ironically, Drew Breese is by definition a sort of revolutionary now that nearly everyone agrees with the sentiments the players and now Goodell put forth. The only sincere thing Goodell said was, "without black players, there would be no National Football League." Outside of that, he is not saying anything too controversial in today's climate. For example, Paul Pierce said he wouldn't play with Drew Breese if he was a Saint. Goodell hears that and knows what is at stake if black players start to act on their anger. At the same, it's easy for Pierce to talk. We'll see if NFL players would actually sit out if they don't see any actions from the league or its owners. As much as people want organizations to actually do something outside of releasing statements like this, people need to do something if they dont. NFL players would be no different than Goodell or the owners if after seeing them not do anything, they still suit up and play for them and cash their checks. It would be funny now if players don't want to protest anymore now that the NFL doesn't have a problem with it. Also, I wonder if Jerry Jones agrees with this and if he'll allow the Cowboys to protest.
People ask when the movement will be over. And I laugh a little because I think now that White people think it's cool to kneel before the flag and march with BLM, it's almost over on account they didn't really want anyone to join the cause. They are like wait, that's suspicious. And they are probably right, Corporate America is going to try and cash in. ESPN, Nike, and whoever else can make money off it. Once they start advertising during the riots, we'll know we've gone where only greed can take you. Rioters will be carrying Gatorade. Same thing happened to hip hop. Rinse and Repeat. If it does some good, then I'm all for it, but is it a revolution once everyone agrees with you because of good reasons and greedy ones.